Thanks for your correction. UTF-8 (not utf8) is in that list.
But, UTF-8 is a character encoding form of UCS and does not specify the specific set of supported characters in the numerous versions of UCS. That is the point where utf-8 and iso8859-1/ksc_5601_1987 differ. I.e., UTF-8 defines encoding schemes over UCS which has been an open set and will remains as an open set. UTF-8 , from its definition, cannot have versioing suffices, like "utf-8-3.2" or "utf-8-3.1". That's why "utf-8" should not be regardsed as a "genuine" charset, IMO. Correct me if i am wrong at some points. Thanks. Soobok Lee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Hoffman / IMC" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Soobok Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 10:36 AM Subject: Re: [idn] utf8/legacy versioning > At 10:11 AM +0900 6/3/02, Soobok Lee wrote: > >Moreover, It does not have "utf8" charset entry, because "utf8" is > >just one of the encodings of the Universal > >Character Set, not an independent charset plus encoding like "ks_c_5601-1987". > > Both your statement and your reasoning are wrong. UTF-8 has been a > registered charset since RFC 2279 was issued. > > --Paul Hoffman, Director > --Internet Mail Consortium
